在創新成為現今企業生存策略的趨勢之下，被廣泛地視為是實現以人為本的創新之有效途徑的設計思考因此日漸受到關注，而所謂的以人為本，即是以同理心去看待使用者。目前在台灣多是以工作坊的形式在進行設計思考教學推廣，而在工作坊中，參與的學員透過方法學或工具的運用及互動討論，多方且多次的在各個階段中有著運用同理心的機會並受到來自他人的刺激。由此提出疑問：工作坊參與學員的同理心在經由學習設計思考後是否會受到學習形式及內容的影響而有所提升？以此為動機，提出研究目的—「探討以工作坊形式學習設計思考對同理心的影響」，並從（1）了解參與設計思考工作坊學員同理心前後的差異，與（2）探討同理心有/無差異產生之可能原因兩方向來進行探討。在以成對樣本T檢定針對工作坊學員之IRI四個分量表進行統計後，得出幻想(FS)有顯著提升，其餘三向度則無顯著差異；而在經由質性編碼針對「設計思考階段」、「同理心四向度」、「同理對象」以及「展現同理的時機」四個主類別及其子類別進行分析後，發現同理心並非運用多次即會提升，由此進一步與可能使同理心提升之三項潛在因素：「轉換視角」、「融入非自我角色」、「自我慈悲」相互比較對應，得出9項在設計思考工作坊中可能使同理心提升的同理子類別與其對應表。透過本研究成果，可知透過涵蓋完整設計思考階段的短時間工作坊學習，對於學員幻想(FS)向度之同理心具有正向影響，且同時具有提升觀點取替(PT)向度之潛力；而同理心子類別與三因素之對應表，可進一步做為未來規劃與辦理設計思考工作坊時在教學中用於檢視與誘發學員同理之參考依據，更可為往後相關研究沿用，繼續擴充在工作坊中會產生的同理心型態，以完整在設計思考工作坊學習過程中的同理心樣貌。

As innovation become the survival strategy of today's enterprises, Design Thinking (DT), which is broadly regarded as an effective way to realize human-centred innovative design, has attracted increasing attention. “Human-centred” means to treat and understand users with empathy. Currently, workshop is a common form to teach DT in Taiwan. Through using methodology and interactive discussions, the participants have multiple opportunities to empathize at various stages and are stimulated by others in workshop. This raises the question: will empathy be enhanced after DT workshop due to the learning format and content? Taking this as motivation, the purpose of this study is "to explore the influence of learning DT through workshop on empathy” and will be conducted from the following two directions: (1)Understanding the difference in the participants’ empathy before and after participating in the design thinking workshop; (2) Explore the possible causes for the difference/non-difference in the participants’ empathy. After statistical analysis of the four subscales of IRI by paired sample T-test, it was concluded that Fantasy (FS) was significantly enhanced, and the other three were not. Through qualitative coding, the four main categories and subcategories of "DT stages", "four empathy dimensions", "object of empathizing" and "timing of expressing empathy" are analyzed, and it is found that the participants’ empathy cannot be enhanced just depending on the times of using empathy. After further comparing the outcome of coding with the three potential factors that may improve empathy: " perspective changing", "getting into non-self-roles", and "self-compassion", 9 potential subcategories of empathy and the corresponding table are obtained. Through the study results, it is known that short-term DT workshops which cover complete stages of design thinking have a positive influence on FS and have the potential to enhance the participants’ empathy in PT at the same time. Besides, the corresponding table can also be used as the reference for reviewing and triggering the participants’ empathy when planning and conducting design thinking workshops in the future, or expanding the types of empathy generated in the workshop in the future studies to complete the appearance of empathy in the learning process of DT.

Baldner, C., & McGinley, J. J. (2014). Correlational and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) of commonly used empathy questionnaires: New insights. Motivation and Emotion, 38(5), 727-744.
Bella, M., & Hanington, B. (2012). Universal methods of design. Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishers, 204.
Birnie, K., Speca, M., & Carlson, L. E. (2010). Exploring self‐compassion and empathy in the context of mindfulness‐based stress reduction (MBSR). Stress and Health, 26(5), 359-371.
Brenner, W., Uebernickel, F., & Abrell, T. (2016). Design thinking as mindset, process, and toolbox. In Design thinking for innovation (pp. 3-21). Springer, Cham.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard business review, 86(6), 84
Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Development Outreach, 12(1), 29-43.
Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2011). Change by design. Journal of product innovation management, 28(3), 381-383.
Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2019). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation (Vol. 20091). HarperBusiness.
Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations: A primer for lay and professional helpers: I. Selection and training.
Carleton, T., & Leifer, L. （2009）. Stanford’s ME310 course as an evolution of engineering design. In R. Roy & E. Shehab （Eds.）, Proceedings of the 19th CIRP Design Conference – Competitive design （pp. 547–554）. Cranfield: Cranfield University.
Chang, K. T. (2013). 設計系大學生的同理心培育法. 成功大學工業設計學系學位論文, 1-131.
Chasanidou, D., Gasparini, A., & Lee, E. (2014, October). Design thinking methods and tools for innovation in multidisciplinary teams. In Workshop Innovation in HCI. Helsinki, Finland: NordiCHI (Vol. 14, No. 2014, pp. 27-30).
Cheang, R., Gillions, A., & Sparkes, E. (2019). Do mindfulness-based interventions increase empathy and compassion in children and adolescents: A systematic review. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(7), 1765-1779.
Cross, N. (2012). From a design science to a design discipline: Understanding designerly ways of knowing and thinking. In Design research now (pp. 41-54). Birkhäuser.
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 44(1), 113.
Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach.
d.school Paris. (2016). ME310 design innovation. Retrieved October, 2016, from http://www.dschool.fr/en/me310/
Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annual review of psychology, 51(1), 665-697.
Feshbach, N. D., &Feshbach Kuchenbecker, S. Y. (1974). A Three Component Model of Empathy.
Gladstein, G. A. (1983). Understanding empathy: Integrating counseling, developmental, and social psychology perspectives. Journal of counseling psychology, 30(4), 467.
Gray, B. (2008). Multiculturalism and Feminism: From the wanting of affect to the possibilities of empathy Paper presented at the Second Global Conference, Multiculturalism Conflict and Belonging,.
Grots, A., & Pratschke, M. (2009). Design thinking—kreativität als methode. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 26(2), 18-23.
Goldstein, T. R., & Winner, E. (2012). Enhancing empathy and theory of mind. Journal of cognition and development, 13(1), 19-37.
Hunsdahl, J. B. (1967). Concerning Einfühlung (empathy): A concept analysis of its origin and early development. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 3(2), 180–191.
Hogan,R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33(3), 307-316. doi: 10.1037/h0027580
Ickes, W. (1993). Empathic accuracy. Journal of personality, 61(4), 587-610.
Ickes W. (2003). Everyday mind reading. Understanding what other people think and feel. New York: Prometheus Books.
Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. Currency.
Kouprie, M., & Visser, F. S. (2009). A framework for empathy in design: stepping into and out of the user's life. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 437-448.
Krippendorff, K. (2005). The semantic turn: A new foundation for design. crc Press.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis, and interpretation (Vol. 47). Sage.
Liedtka, J., & Ogilvie, T. (2011). Designing for growth: A design thinking tool kit for managers. Columbia University Press.
Marshall, S. L., Ciarrochi, J., Parker, P. D., & Sahdra, B. K. (2020). Is self‐compassion selfish? The development of self‐compassion, empathy, and prosocial behavior in adolescence. Journal of research on adolescence, 30, 472-484.
Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (Eds.). (2011). Understanding Innovation (pp. 17-18). Springer.
Neff, K. (2003). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and identity, 2(2), 85-101.
Neff, K. D., & Pommier, E. (2013). The relationship between self-compassion and other-focused concern among college undergraduates, community adults, and practicing meditators. Self and identity, 12(2), 160-176.
Pietrzak, T., Hauke, G., & Lohr, C. (2016). Connecting Couples Intervention: Improving couples’ empathy and emotional regulation using embodied empathy mechanisms. European psychotherapy, 13, 66-98.
Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (Eds.). (2012). Design thinking research. Berlin: Springer.
Poorman, P. B. (2002). Biography and role playing: Fostering empathy in abnormal psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 29(1), 32-36.
Richter, D., & Kunzmann, U. (2011). Age differences in three facets of empathy: Performance-based evidence. Psychology and aging, 26(1), 60.
Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of consulting psychology, 21(2), 95.
Rogers, C. R. (1975). Empathic: An unappreciated way of being. The counseling psychologist, 5(2), 2-10.
Rogers, C. R. (1980). Growing old—or older and growing. Journal of humanistic psychology, 20(4), 5-16.
Roth, B. (2015a). The achievement habit. HarperCollins.
Roth, B. (2015b). Design thinking in Stanford. In C. Meinel, U. Weinberg & T. Krohn （Eds.）, Design thinking live （pp. 64–71; 250–251）. Hamburg: Murmann.
Robert, C. (2013). Design Thinking: Process and Methods Manual.
Reik, T. (1949). Fragment of a great confession: A psychoanalytic autobiography.
Smeenk, W., Sturm, J., Terken, J., & Eggen, B. (2019). A systematic validation of the empathic handover approach guided by five factors that foster empathy in design. CoDesign, 15(4), 308-328.
Spencer, H. (1870). Thee Principles of Psychology. London: Williams and.
Stein, E. (1917). Zum problem der Einfühlung (No. 4). Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses.
Stavroulia, K. E., Baka, E., Lanitis, A., & Magnenat-Thalmann, N. (2018). Designing a virtual environment for teacher training: Enhancing presence and empathy. In Proceedings of Computer Graphics International 2018 (pp. 273-282).
Tschimmel, K. (2012). Design Thinking as an effective Toolkit for Innovation. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings (p. 1). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
Von Thienen, J. P., Clancey, W. J., Corazza, G. E., & Meinel, C. (2018). Theoretical foundations of design thinking. In Design Thinking Research (pp. 13-40). Springer, Cham.
von Thienen, J. P. A., Ford, C., & Meinel, C. (2016). The emergence of design thinking in Californian engineering classes: Four historic concepts worth knowing. In Talk at the MIC conference: From creative brains to creative societies (pp. 14-16).
Weinberg, U. (2016). Design thinking (Interview). Ideen & Management, Materialien für nachhaltige Unternehmensführung, 1, 4–7.
林書兵. (2014). 基於工作坊的實踐教學模式的應用與探析. 現代教育論叢, (3), 67-71.
姜雪, & 劉春陽. (2010). 基于體驗學習理論的大學英語工作坊. US-China Foreign Language, 8(6), 46-51.
張楚鶯. (2010). 基於工作坊的商務英語翻譯教學模式的應用與探析.
張春興. (1989). 張氏心理學辭典. 台北: 東華.
劉禹, & 王來福. (2009). 基於工作坊的高等教育實踐教學體系的研究. 東北財經大學學報, (1), 93-96.